fs/xfs/xfs_exchrange.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Hi all,
After merging the bpf-next tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
fs/xfs/xfs_exchrange.c: In function 'xfs_ioc_commit_range':
fs/xfs/xfs_exchrange.c:938:19: error: 'struct fd' has no member named 'file'
938 | if (!file1.file)
| ^
fs/xfs/xfs_exchrange.c:940:26: error: 'struct fd' has no member named 'file'
940 | fxr.file1 = file1.file;
| ^
Caused by commit
1da91ea87aef ("introduce fd_file(), convert all accessors to it.")
interacting with commit
398597c3ef7f ("xfs: introduce new file range commit ioctls")
I have applied the following patch for today.
From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2024 13:53:35 +1000
Subject: [PATCH] fix up 3 for "introduce fd_file(), convert all accessors to
it."
interacting with commit "xfs: introduce new file range commit ioctls"
from the xfs tree.
Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
---
fs/xfs/xfs_exchrange.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_exchrange.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_exchrange.c
index 39fe02a8deac..75cb53f090d1 100644
--- a/fs/xfs/xfs_exchrange.c
+++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_exchrange.c
@@ -935,9 +935,9 @@ xfs_ioc_commit_range(
fxr.file2_ctime.tv_nsec = kern_f->file2_ctime_nsec;
file1 = fdget(args.file1_fd);
- if (!file1.file)
+ if (fd_empty(file1))
return -EBADF;
- fxr.file1 = file1.file;
+ fxr.file1 = fd_file(file1);
error = xfs_exchange_range(&fxr);
fdput(file1);
--
2.45.2
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
Hi all,
On Fri, 13 Sep 2024 13:55:51 +1000 Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au> wrote:
>
> After merging the bpf-next tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
>
> fs/xfs/xfs_exchrange.c: In function 'xfs_ioc_commit_range':
> fs/xfs/xfs_exchrange.c:938:19: error: 'struct fd' has no member named 'file'
> 938 | if (!file1.file)
> | ^
> fs/xfs/xfs_exchrange.c:940:26: error: 'struct fd' has no member named 'file'
> 940 | fxr.file1 = file1.file;
> | ^
>
> Caused by commit
>
> 1da91ea87aef ("introduce fd_file(), convert all accessors to it.")
>
> interacting with commit
>
> 398597c3ef7f ("xfs: introduce new file range commit ioctls")
>
> I have applied the following patch for today.
>
> From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
> Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2024 13:53:35 +1000
> Subject: [PATCH] fix up 3 for "introduce fd_file(), convert all accessors to
> it."
>
> interacting with commit "xfs: introduce new file range commit ioctls"
> from the xfs tree.
>
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
> ---
> fs/xfs/xfs_exchrange.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_exchrange.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_exchrange.c
> index 39fe02a8deac..75cb53f090d1 100644
> --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_exchrange.c
> +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_exchrange.c
> @@ -935,9 +935,9 @@ xfs_ioc_commit_range(
> fxr.file2_ctime.tv_nsec = kern_f->file2_ctime_nsec;
>
> file1 = fdget(args.file1_fd);
> - if (!file1.file)
> + if (fd_empty(file1))
> return -EBADF;
> - fxr.file1 = file1.file;
> + fxr.file1 = fd_file(file1);
>
> error = xfs_exchange_range(&fxr);
> fdput(file1);
> --
> 2.45.2
This is now required in the merge of the vfs tree.
--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell
On Fri, Sep 13, 2024 at 01:55:51PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> After merging the bpf-next tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
>
> fs/xfs/xfs_exchrange.c: In function 'xfs_ioc_commit_range':
> fs/xfs/xfs_exchrange.c:938:19: error: 'struct fd' has no member named 'file'
> 938 | if (!file1.file)
> | ^
> fs/xfs/xfs_exchrange.c:940:26: error: 'struct fd' has no member named 'file'
> 940 | fxr.file1 = file1.file;
> | ^
>
> Caused by commit
>
> 1da91ea87aef ("introduce fd_file(), convert all accessors to it.")
>
> interacting with commit
>
> 398597c3ef7f ("xfs: introduce new file range commit ioctls")
>
> I have applied the following patch for today.
>
> From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
> Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2024 13:53:35 +1000
> Subject: [PATCH] fix up 3 for "introduce fd_file(), convert all accessors to
> it."
>
> interacting with commit "xfs: introduce new file range commit ioctls"
> from the xfs tree.
... and the same for io_uring/rsrc.c, conflict with "io_uring: add IORING_REGISTER_COPY_BUFFERS method".
FWIW, that (sub)series is in viro/vfs.git#for-next - I forgot to put it
there, so when bpf tree reorgs had lost their branch on top of that thing,
the conflict fixes got dropped from -next. Sorry... ;-/
On Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 9:00 PM Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2024 at 01:55:51PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > After merging the bpf-next tree, today's linux-next build (powerpc
> > ppc64_defconfig) failed like this:
> >
> > fs/xfs/xfs_exchrange.c: In function 'xfs_ioc_commit_range':
> > fs/xfs/xfs_exchrange.c:938:19: error: 'struct fd' has no member named 'file'
> > 938 | if (!file1.file)
> > | ^
> > fs/xfs/xfs_exchrange.c:940:26: error: 'struct fd' has no member named 'file'
> > 940 | fxr.file1 = file1.file;
> > | ^
> >
> > Caused by commit
> >
> > 1da91ea87aef ("introduce fd_file(), convert all accessors to it.")
> >
> > interacting with commit
> >
> > 398597c3ef7f ("xfs: introduce new file range commit ioctls")
> >
> > I have applied the following patch for today.
> >
> > From: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
> > Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2024 13:53:35 +1000
> > Subject: [PATCH] fix up 3 for "introduce fd_file(), convert all accessors to
> > it."
> >
> > interacting with commit "xfs: introduce new file range commit ioctls"
> > from the xfs tree.
>
> ... and the same for io_uring/rsrc.c, conflict with "io_uring: add IORING_REGISTER_COPY_BUFFERS method".
>
> FWIW, that (sub)series is in viro/vfs.git#for-next - I forgot to put it
> there, so when bpf tree reorgs had lost their branch on top of that thing,
> the conflict fixes got dropped from -next. Sorry... ;-/
Should I take out the following from bpf-next/for-next for now?
a8e40fd0f127 ("Merge branch 'bpf-next/struct_fd' into for-next")
Al, currently I'm basing my patches on top of your stable-struct_fd
branch. If you need to update it, I think that's fine, I can rebase on
top of the updated branch, given my patches weren't yet merged
anywhere. Let me know.
On Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 09:26:31PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> Should I take out the following from bpf-next/for-next for now?
>
> a8e40fd0f127 ("Merge branch 'bpf-next/struct_fd' into for-next")
>
> Al, currently I'm basing my patches on top of your stable-struct_fd
> branch. If you need to update it, I think that's fine, I can rebase on
> top of the updated branch, given my patches weren't yet merged
> anywhere. Let me know.
al@duke:~/linux/trees/temp$ git describe for-next
v6.11-rc1-3-gde12c3391bce
al@duke:~/linux/trees/temp$ git describe stable-struct_fd
v6.11-rc1-3-gde12c3391bce
IOW, #for-next is currently identical to that branch (will grow a merge
shortly); no need to rebase anything.
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.